>Anyone shocked by Toyota overtaking GM is not a student of business history. Companies who remain dominant for long periods of time (decades) are the exception, not the rule. This excludes monopolies and oligopolies, who are aided by the government. I am talking about "ordinary" corporations.

General Motors was (is) bigger assets-wise than many countries of the world. And their product has not gone the way of the buggy-whip or the locomotive or the telegraph key. In fact their product (cars/trucks) is more widely wanted now than ever before.

But my main point is that if even the mighty General Motors can be overtaken, then the U.S. economy as a whole can also be usurped. Despite the massive variance apparent today compared to other countries.



>
>Are you going to be shocked when the 1990s are looked back upon as Microsoft's time of dominance?
>
>
>>Yes, TracyH provided a link to a long list of exports by the U.S.
>>
>>But it remains my contention that the huge U.S. GNP is only really serving to mask what's happening - fewer tangible goods being exported by the U.S. as outsourcing grows. Who would ever have guessed, even 25 years ago, that Toyota would make/sell more vehicles than General Motors?!?!
>>
>>Many 'experts' still say that good ol' American innovation will keep the economy the greatest, as it has several times in the past. I say they are wrong!
>>
>>Things are vastly different these days. Corporate leaders default to China as the place for goods to be produced. Sure, they may be discovered/invented/designed in the U.S. But it is in the production where the JOBS are. In the old days 25 'designers' would create stuff to be manufactured locally by 2000+ factory workers. Now those 25 designers send the blueprints off to China and the goods get produced at near-slave cost with great profit margins when sold back in the U.S. of A.
>>
>>
>>
>>>We must still be producing something, Jim, given that the U.S. accounts for over 30% of global GNP and has a GNP more than double that of any other country.
>>>
>>>http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/gnp.html
>>>
>>>You are entirely correct, though, that the increasing U.S. trade deficit has a lot more to do with China than it does with Canada and Mexico.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>But that is not 'free trade' but protectionism. Increasing exports creates jobs but increases in imports diminish jobs because the imports displace goods that otherwise would have been made here. Since NAFTA we've experienced growing trade deficits and job losses.
>>>>
>>>>While I don't think NAFTA has been good, I strongly suspect that it is really corporate U.S. 'trade' with China that is the prime source of "growing trade deficits and job losses".
>>>>
>>>>I wonder how much of WalMart sales are not products of Chinese origin??? WalMart 'helps' its suppliers to relocate to China. This is where the jobs are lost in a big way. And of course many of the goods produced in China are for the U.S. market, so when they come in they handily create a trade deficit.
>>>>
>>>>Aside from armaments, I wonder what products are produced in the U.S. today that are in demand by other countries? Bank loans?... Insurance policies?... Marketing/PR firms?... Cars and trucks?... Beer/wine/liquor?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Here is an interesting view from the Economic Policy Institute:
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/briefingpapers_bp147
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>For that to happen, rich nations should lower their own barriers to imports and allow poor nations to protect their own industries with tarrifs; but it seems to be the other way around.